Sentences with phrase «evolutionary view of the development»

Not exact matches

For Bergson, like many process thinkers (Peirce, James and Dewey come particularly to mind), the entire concept of «necessity» only makes sense when applied internally to abstractions the intellect has already devised.11 Of course, one can tell an evolutionary story about how the human intellect came to be a separable function of consciousness that emphasizes abstraction (indeed, that is what Bergson does in Creative Evolution), but if one were to say that the course of development described in that story had to occur (i.e., necessarily) as it did, then one would be very far from Bergson's view (CE 218, 236, 270of «necessity» only makes sense when applied internally to abstractions the intellect has already devised.11 Of course, one can tell an evolutionary story about how the human intellect came to be a separable function of consciousness that emphasizes abstraction (indeed, that is what Bergson does in Creative Evolution), but if one were to say that the course of development described in that story had to occur (i.e., necessarily) as it did, then one would be very far from Bergson's view (CE 218, 236, 270Of course, one can tell an evolutionary story about how the human intellect came to be a separable function of consciousness that emphasizes abstraction (indeed, that is what Bergson does in Creative Evolution), but if one were to say that the course of development described in that story had to occur (i.e., necessarily) as it did, then one would be very far from Bergson's view (CE 218, 236, 270of consciousness that emphasizes abstraction (indeed, that is what Bergson does in Creative Evolution), but if one were to say that the course of development described in that story had to occur (i.e., necessarily) as it did, then one would be very far from Bergson's view (CE 218, 236, 270of development described in that story had to occur (i.e., necessarily) as it did, then one would be very far from Bergson's view (CE 218, 236, 270).

In this view, the predominant direction of evolutionary development is from simpler states of affairs to more complex ones.

Covering two centuries of views on the relation between evolution and development, the author examines the modern synthesis that led to estrangement between the fields and the current contrasts between evo - devo and mainstream evolutionary biology.

Rejecting dichotomous views of development, Goldhaber suggests that a synthesis of evolutionary psychology and developmental systems theory will resolve long - standing debates.

Our data on the evolutionary conservation of digit development are in support of the views of many developmental biologists that the identity of the digits in the wing of birds can not be homologous to the identity of digits in the forelimbs of their hypothesized dinosaur ancestors, unless the identity of digits in theropods is erroneous.